Rocky View County council rejected a bid to divide several Bearspaw acreages, May 1.
The controversial application, which was rejected by council in March 2011 in a tie vote, was presented by a group of four Big Sky Close landowners wishing to subdivide their parcels into two-acre plots.
“The majority of residents who would be directly impacted do not want this,” said Councillor Al Sacuta, who made the motion to reject the application. “If we believe that residents should decide what their neighbourhood is going to look like, we should look at what the majority wants.”
Council circulated the application to 38 area landowners last October and received 20 letters in support of the application and 10 in opposition.
However, Sacuta noted that five residents of the rural cul-de-sac and adjoining plots were opposed and four were in favour.
“At this point in time, this type of designation in our community is wrong,” he said. “There’s not enough community buy-in for us to say ‘yes.’”
During a public hearing, several area residents spoke on either side of the issue.
“These objections are coming from a sense of extreme entitlement,” said area resident Louise Locke. “The position of the objectors is not respectful of their neighbours’ rights to subdivide their property.”
Michelle Vaccaro, another area resident, added that subdivision of the parcels would make the land more manageable, while still remaining secluded and private. Those who spoke in opposition stated the rezoning did not comply with the Bearspaw Area Structure Plan, noting issues of lot constraints, access to existing infrastructure, slope of the land, sewage disposal, stormwater management, and visual impact. Rocky View’s Director of Operations Byron Riemann said subdivision into two-acre parcels would not be considered high-density infill in the county and that staff recommended the application’s approval. Following Sacuta’s motion to reject the application, councillors took turns debating the issue.
“The community as a whole has come out more in favour of the development than against,” said Councillor Greg Boehlke, adding that he was opposed to the motion.
“The people proposing development have as many rights as the people that are against it.”
Reeve Rolly Ashdown echoed these sentiments, adding that the subdivision would fit well with the community.
“I think adminstration got it right and this should be approved,” said Ashdown. “I can’t go in favour of rejecting something that makes sense everywhere I look.”
Sacuta reiterated that council should not move forward on the matter without overwhelming community buy-in.
Sacuta’s motion was carried 5-4, with Deputy Reeve Margaret Bahcheli and councillors Sacuta, Liz Breakey, Kim Magnuson, and Paul McLean in favour, and Ashdown and Councillors Boehlke, Habberfield and Earl Solberg opposed.
